Tuesday, January 8, 2008

* Heather Steans Doesn't Follow Rules

Hey, Serial Litterbug Heather Steans...
Shame on YOU!

The City of Chicago prohibits any signs in the public right of way. The fact that the signs are not allowed in the public right of way means the City of Chicago and it's residents consider this trash. It goes by other names too.

Some residents call it garbage, some residents call it litter.

If you have the pleasure of driving down Howard, Devon, Ridge, Hollywood, Clark or Montrose - this is what you'll see. Miles and miles of litter left on the public way by the Heather 'I Approve of Littering' Steans campaign.

49th Ward Streets and Sanitation Supervisor Mike Erikson doesn't tolerate this and does type of behavior - and does his best to make sure these signs don't pollute the public way. Although, once in a while, one slips by him and he has to go around and collect this trash. At the expense of the tax payers.

I talked with 46th Ward Streets and Sanitation supervisor Don Nowotny yesterday and he agreed with the over-abundant campaign sign garbage. He promised to make sure NO CAMPAIGN SIGNS would be allowed to be placed on public way property until 48 hours before the election. He added, he only wants to see them around official polling places. Not on every street corner and park way.

The 46th, 48th and the 49th wards supervisors are doing their job - not worrying about political pressure for removing these campaign signs.

But, for the most part, they go unnoticed by Streets and Sanitation. 40th, 47th and 50th Ward Streets and Sanitation supervisors and workers seem to be the laziest - or they're just plain blind. Or they're on the take, 'Old Machine Style - Chicago Politics'. These were the wards I found at least 20 violations of littering.

Why are these campaign signs allowed to stay? It's called political connections. Most of the time, it's because the local public officials have a 'IN" with the Streets and Sanitation 'cronyism' personal to leave these signs alone. They pressure them not to do their job. Unless it's the competitions campaign sign of course.

Basically, the local officials approve of littering. A, "Do as I say, not as I do", deal. Had I known Heather was going to turn out to be such a litter bug, I would've asked that question on my candidate questionnaire I submitted to the candidates of the 7th District of Illinois. (If you'd like to read Heather's interview, pick up a copy of Gay Chicago Magazine today.)


Unknown said...

As I recall, our ward superintendent makes a one-day exception to the rule against political litter on public spaces: on Election Day only, campaign signs are allowed to be erected outside of polling places before they open and are to be removed by the campaigns by the following morning.

Beyond campaign tactics, we all likely have other questions about state government issues for 7th district state senate candidates Heather Steans and Suzanne Elder. Anyone can raise them at the Rogers Park Voter Candidate's Forum on Saturday, January 19 at 1pm at United Church of Rogers Park, 1545 W. Morse Ave. Supporting political accountability and fair elections are cornerstones of the mission for our non-partisan Rogers Park Voter organization. More info is at www.rogersparkvoter.org.

Fire Ron Guenther said...

Heather Steans has donated to Republicans in the past, so I ask you, Carol Ronen: Is Heather really a progressive?

Craig Gernhardt said...

Republican donations are the least of Heather's problems at the moment. Wait until we hook her up with 'Public Official A'.

Craig Gernhardt said...

Sources have told the Chicago Sun-Times that Rod Blagojevich is “Public Official A” in recent court filings in the Toni Rezko case.

The governor allegedly offered contracts and other financial rewards in return for political favors, according to cooperating witnesses.

billyjoe said...

Wow. Apparently the only thing that makes Craig more livid than human shit on el stop stairs and dog shit on parkways is campaign signs.

Test said...

LMAO @ Billyjoe

Estes Dude said...

I saw one of these signs in front of the crack house on Touhy

DorothyParker007 said...

Crime against humanity. Its never been done before, not in Chicago. I say hold the candidates to the fire. Lets not talk about issues, lets hang them for signs on parkways, yeah, make her wear a scarlett L on her sweater

bloglurker49 said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Craig Gernhardt said...

I don't agree with Michael on all issues, but he's got far more credibility in his pinky finger - than you've got in every bone in your body.

With Harrington, we've got a face to go with name and the words.

Keep lurking, we don't need your snide, drive-by comments unless you can produce a name like Harrington does.

You coward.

The Half Jap said...

Such Shameless self promotion.........Gotta get the name of your "publication" out there.

Jeff Smith said...

I will take a slightly contrary position on this. Tho I am working for Elder, I didn't see this as Steans campaign "littering." Huge display of campaign fund advantage and ward organization support, yes; littering, no. If the campaign picks up the signs once down, it's not littering.

Why I don't mind signs: as security buildings etc. make it harder and harder for person-to-person contact and put more and more of a premium on money and slick mailings, or even TV, cheap methods like signs are one of the last ways for a smaller-funded campaign to get the attention of the public. Of course a well-oiled machine placement of signs is hardly an indicator of grassroots support. But at least it is a potential equalizer.

Yeah, technically what Steans did was illegal. But I'd like to see the City and state laws say that in the 30 days before an election, certain public property such as most parkways is public bandwidth. No candidate could have more than 1 sign per block, signs should have a size limit, signs should not interfere with traffic visibility or signaling or hide hydrants etc. Nothing should be affixed to a tree. The campaign must be required to remove all signs afterward. That would seem more commonsense, a compromise between unlimited visual pollution and a complete ban on communication to the public. By temporarily devoting a public asset to equal use by all campaigns it would be in effect a form of public financing of campaigns.

'Broken Heart' Past Blogs